The Ends Principle and the Saber-Tooth Curriculum

My understanding of the “ends principle” is still evolving. I’m hoping that by typing out my thoughts, I will deepen my grasp on this concept. I enjoyed our class conversation about The Saber-Tooth Curriculum. At times, it gave me some hope that education could move forward to help students learn more than simple activities, but then the powers behind the educational system would crush any ideas to move it forward. The actual curriculum of fish-grabbing-with-bare-hands, horse-clubbing, and tiger-scaring were taught as distinct skills, but eventually, in defense of these specific skills being taught, the administration explained that they were trying to teach students generalized agility, generalized strength, and noble courage, respectively. The three activities were being used to teach more general life-skills, but when asked if they could try to use activities more suited to the current situation, like fishing with nets, the powers-that-be said no. The means the Paleolithic educators were using to reach their ends were not engaging or relevant, therefore, not appropriate or effective means to reach the end goals.  Later, another teacher pointed out that "schools are educational institutions..." supposed to change students for the better. They’re to teach students how to think, not what to think. Applying the “PICKLE” as part of the means would help create thinkers who would be better equipped to be do-ers in the end, if and when conditions change and don’t perfectly match the skills originally taught in school.

From the Burma Shave activity, my partner, Emily, and I took our reflections from The Saber-Tooth Curriculum and distilled them to create slogans that reveal good design practice. The activity we were completing, actually writing the Burma Shaves and putting them on PowerPoint slides, was not necessarily teaching us any new content, but it was helping us have focused, meaningful discussion, from which we could take what we took from our reading and put it into the framework of good design practice. We also had a lot of fun and some laughs, which made it much more engaging as an activity. Our deeper understanding was obviously the ultimate goal, not a cute slideshow, so I believe that’s indicative of the “ends principle.”

Dr. Norton said she feels the content and standards are the means to reach the ends, with the ends being larger understandings and the PICKLE. I also heard and understand another 3^rd grade teacher’s concern about her administration’s stressing of the SOL test scores. I am very lucky that the administration at my elementary school recognizes that my third graders will be prepared for the SOL tests without stressing over repeated practice tests, remediation groups all year, and other test-test-test ridiculousness that takes away our ability to educate. Yes, our some of our students will need remediation, and yes, we need to collect data frequently to make sure our students are learning, but our principal is also looking for the bigger ideas and activities through which our students will learn, like engaging, hands-on, practical activities. I know we are a lucky school.

This ends principle makes me consider how I am choosing my goals and activities for my students. When I plan lessons for my students, I obviously have the third grade SOL standards to keep in mind. However, I should also be thinking about how to wrap these standards into more PICKLE-focused activities. If my students were more problem-solving, community-minded, information-using students who were able to distinguish good information from the dubious information, they would be able to connect to the content I am trying to teach them. Through their deeper understanding, they would be more than ready for those SOL tests and be on track to be more engaged citizens!